WI: Earlier Holistic Grazing?

First off, I know this is a huge ask, because the idea I’m proposing was developed in response to a problem (desertification) and goes against prevailing wisdom. So, its hard to imagine it coming into practice early.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holistic_management_(agriculture)

https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/reversing-desertification-with-livestock

The basic idea is to fight desertification not by avoiding over grazing, but by grazing more thoughtfully. It makes sense when you think about it for a moment: animals are essential to restoring nutrients to the soil - dung decomposes far more readily than dead plants. Just as important, they eat dead plant cover that would otherwise strangle new plants. This is true for small livestock like sheep up to large non-domesticated animals like elephants.

So, rather than remove livestock from marginal lands, intense dense grazing is possible. This improves the output on its own, and from the consequence of homding back the desert.

The system is not without its critics, but lets set those aside for the moment and operate under the assumption that the proponents are correct.

How early could this system come into being, plausibly, and what might the consequences be if it was?

I could see maybe the 19th century, during the scramble for Africa. You’ve got a bunch of colonizers with an absolutely hubristic faith in modern science. Just the sort of people to go up to pastoralists who had been there since literally before the dawn of history and tell them they’re wrong. Or who just want to find a way to exploit the less productive parts of their new colonial empires.
 
This is actually comparable to a lot of traditional grazing practices-for example, if you read about animal husbandry in some traditional societies it tends to fall into grazing not on prime agricultural land but on in many cases areas that are marginal to farming or non-animal husbandry or in connection with non-row crop agriculture-e.g. grazing lands in the Scottish uplands or in Central Asia, where less productive scrub areas can be grazed by herders who can sell animals for use or benefit from eg sheep's milk, wool, meat, etc.
 
I could see maybe the 19th century, during the scramble for Africa. You’ve got a bunch of colonizers with an absolutely hubristic faith in modern science. Just the sort of people to go up to pastoralists who had been there since literally before the dawn of history and tell them they’re wrong. Or who just want to find a way to exploit the less productive parts of their new colonial empires.

You have it backwards. Those colonizers were the ones that gave them access to the tools and knowledge to engage in destructive practices. 'Native' practices tended to be more sustainable for the very reason you mentioned, they had long histories, based on success.
 
You have it backwards. Those colonizers were the ones that gave them access to the tools and knowledge to engage in destructive practices. 'Native' practices tended to be more sustainable for the very reason you mentioned, they had long histories, based on success.

First of all, if the sarcasm regarding the attitude I’m suggesting isn’t obvious in thay post, maybe I’ll go back and underline hibristic. Second, desertification predated colonization.
 
This is actually comparable to a lot of traditional grazing practices-for example, if you read about animal husbandry in some traditional societies it tends to fall into grazing not on prime agricultural land but on in many cases areas that are marginal to farming or non-animal husbandry or in connection with non-row crop agriculture-e.g. grazing lands in the Scottish uplands or in Central Asia, where less productive scrub areas can be grazed by herders who can sell animals for use or benefit from eg sheep's milk, wool, meat, etc.

There are similarities, but traditional methods discouraged over grazing as the chief cause of depletion. This method actually promotes highly intensive grazing.
 
Last edited:
There are similarities, but traditional methods discouraged over grazing as the chief cause of depletion. This method actually promotes highly intrnsive grazing.

Do you have details on the second? and what constitutes "over grazing" in traditional methods?
 
You have it backwards. Those colonizers were the ones that gave them access to the tools and knowledge to engage in destructive practices. 'Native' practices tended to be more sustainable for the very reason you mentioned, they had long histories, based on success.

Once they'd killed off the megafauna, and wrecked the pre-existing environment in their own way. Yes, they achieved a level of sustainability based on whatever was left.
 
Top